If you think that averaging placement over the pandemic and lock down years is a better guide to future performance than the most recent year, then I will step out of the conversation.
Hi Duncan, have to disagree with you here. You said to look at the placement records post Brexit (after 2020), hence I took the employment rates of 2021, 2022 and 2023. Now if you want to consider before Brexit then we have to start over again. And if you think that the placement performance during the pandemic isn't a good option then imo only relying on the 2023 FT rankings (which btw have some very weird criteria) isn't a wise decision either.
Btw the FT 2023 rankings have put more emphasis on carbon footprint of the b school then the salary. Now I am not an expert on this matter but what has carbon footprint got to do with the performance of the B Schools..beats me tbh. This year's FT rankings are based on some confusing and unnecessary changes, so just relying on the FT 2023 rankings to make your choice will be a pretty lousy decision.
Now if you want to look at the placement record of these b schools before Brexit (3 years prior to Brexit to be precise) then let me give you the data for the same. We will consider the placements of Durham, Lancaster, Bayes, Imperial and AMBS for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019.
1. Durham -> 2017: 89% 2018: 91% and 2019: 94%
Avg: 91%
2. Imperial -> 2017: 92% 2018: 90% and 2019: 82%
Avg: 88%
3. Bayes ->. 2017: 83% 2018: 83% and 2019: 82%
Avg: 83%
4. AMBS ->. 2017: 76% 2018: 76% and 2019: 77%
Avg: 76%
5. LUMS ->. 2017: 86% 201: 82% and 2019: 85%
Avg: 84%
From the above data we can say that only Durham and to some exten Imperial have done a fair job in keeping a good placement record. Lancaster narrowly beats Bayes and both have done decent to good in terms of placements from 2017-19 and AMBS one of the premier business schools have just recorded 76% average employment rate in 3 years prior to Brexit.
Finally regarding the most recent rankings due to so many changes in the methodology, I still have reservations about it and still won't conside it to be an appropriate guide for B school selection. Since there have been mammoth changes, some are very illogical, hence we have to at least give 2-3 years to this new methodology adopted by FT.
[Edited by overlord47 on Apr 02, 2023]
[quote]If you think that averaging placement over the pandemic and lock down years is a better guide to future performance than the most recent year, then I will step out of the conversation. [/quote]<br><br>Hi Duncan, have to disagree with you here. You said to look at the placement records post Brexit (after 2020), hence I took the employment rates of 2021, 2022 and 2023. Now if you want to consider before Brexit then we have to start over again. And if you think that the placement performance during the pandemic isn't a good option then imo only relying on the 2023 FT rankings (which btw have some very weird criteria) isn't a wise decision either.<br><br><div>Btw the FT 2023 rankings have put more emphasis on carbon footprint of the b school then the salary. Now I am not an expert on this matter but what has carbon footprint got to do with the performance of the B Schools..beats me tbh. This year's FT rankings are based on some confusing and unnecessary changes, so just relying on the FT 2023 rankings to make your choice will be a pretty lousy decision. <br><br>Now if you want to look at the placement record of these b schools before Brexit (3 years prior to Brexit to be precise) then let me give you the data for the same. We will consider the placements of Durham, Lancaster, Bayes, Imperial and AMBS for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019.<br></div><br>1. Durham -> 2017: 89% 2018: 91% and 2019: 94%<br> Avg: 91%<br>2. Imperial -> 2017: 92% 2018: 90% and 2019: 82%<br> Avg: 88%<br>3. Bayes ->. 2017: 83% 2018: 83% and 2019: 82%<br> Avg: 83%<br>4. AMBS ->. 2017: 76% 2018: 76% and 2019: 77%<br> Avg: 76%<br>5. LUMS ->. 2017: 86% 201: 82% and 2019: 85%<br> Avg: 84%<br><br>From the above data we can say that only Durham and to some exten Imperial have done a fair job in keeping a good placement record. Lancaster narrowly beats Bayes and both have done decent to good in terms of placements from 2017-19 and AMBS one of the premier business schools have just recorded 76% average employment rate in 3 years prior to Brexit. <br><br>Finally regarding the most recent rankings due to so many changes in the methodology, I still have reservations about it and still won't conside it to be an appropriate guide for B school selection. Since there have been mammoth changes, some are very illogical, hence we have to at least give 2-3 years to this new methodology adopted by FT.